Massachusetts Health Insurance Connector Authority Board Votes To Proceed With Minimum Coverage Standards
Main Category: Health Insurance / Medical InsuranceArticle Date: 22 Oct 2008 - 11:00 PDT
The Massachusetts Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority board on Friday voted unanimously to proceed with new minimum standards for health coverage, but added exemptions for individuals, unions or employers who can prove that plans that have not been authorized by the state are comparable to the requirements, the Boston Globe reports. In general, state-approved plans must offer benefits for prescription drugs, preventive and primary care, hospitalization, mental health and substance use services, and emergency services. Those who do not have insurance, or cannot prove that their coverage meets these standards, will face an annual tax penalty. The amount of the penalty is $912 this year, but is expected to increase for 2009, state regulators said.
All insurers licensed in the state will be required to tell members whether their policies meet state standards, but individuals will be responsible for ensuring that their coverage is adequate. Leslie Kirwan, the board's chair and state secretary of Administration and Finance, said, "Our intent is to help, not hurt people," adding, "We will continue to track implementation ... to revisit thorny issues as they arise and to make mid-course corrections where necessary."
Some board members raised concerns that employers might not understand how to determine whether their policies meet the state standards, or how to take action if they do not. Jon Kingsdale, executive director of the board, said there will be presentations throughout the state to address these issues.
The board also voted unanimously to delay until Jan. 1, 2010, implementation of rules mandating benefits for radiation and chemotherapy, maternity and newborn care, and diagnostic imaging and screening tests. The delay is intended to give employers more time to adjust their policies. Mailings will be sent to employers and insurers to help explain the changes, Kingsdale said (Lazar, Boston Globe, 10/18).
Editorial
Gov. Deval Patrick (D) and state lawmakers "had high hopes for a new law designed to nudge cities and towns toward getting health coverage through the [state] Group Insurance Commission," but even though GIC "has shown it can offer high-quality plans at better prices," the results "haven't justified that optimism," a Globe editorial states. The Globe asks, "So why aren't more enrolling?" adding, "For one thing, the law requires a 70% yes vote from a union-and-retiree committee," meaning that if either the firefighters or the teachers object, the effort dies." According to the Globe, "Further, with teachers only returning to work in late summer, there has been little time to satisfy all their concerns by the Oct. 1 deadline for enrolling."
Localities that have joined GIC "have seen impressive results," the editorial states, concluding that "[w]ith local budgets hurting, the state can no longer afford baby steps" -- it is "time to require that all cities and towns enroll as soon as the GIC can accommodate them" (Boston Globe, 10/20).
Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.kaisernetwork.org. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at http://www.kaisernetwork.org/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork.org, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
© 2008 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Visit our health insurance / medical insurance section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
14 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/126376.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/126376.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (1)
Who Should Pay Penalty
posted by www.spinsurance.com on 23 Oct 2008 at 2:45 amIn the recent weeks the Repubs. have been bashing the Dems. on socialism. how is it they can be fiscally responsible and not see that covering everyone for healthcare will yield an increase of return on investment downstream. Of course people may be appalled at hearing about a penalty for not having insurance. Some of these are the same people who would saythat being smart is socialism, maybe they need a shot in the arm about the truth. The fact is, uncovered families individuals is an unsustainable model in the near future with over half of the workforce retiring or over the age of 65 we need healthy bodies in the office so that the economy will not crumble under the weight of an aging population.
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.



